Welcome to the best KC Chiefs site on the internet. You can view any post as a visitor, but you are required to register before you can post. Click the register link above, it only takes 30 seconds to start chatting with Chiefs fans from all over the world! Enjoy your stay!

Question about last sundays Cowboys / Cardinals game

0

I've been watching football for quite a while, but something I saw in last Sundays Cowboys / Cardinals game has me confused. On the play where Romo was hit and fumbled in the endzone , they said it was the "Tuck" rule so no fumble. Ok that's fine, but the Cardinals did stop him in the endzone and tackled him, should that not have been at the least a saftey?

Instead the Cowboys get the ball some where around the 19 yard line. Didn't seem right to me.

I agree with you. The Cowboys got out of a Cards td or safety just because Romo's arm was (barely it seemed) going forward. Doesn't seem right. That's what this Tuck rule does, sadly.

Throughout this game I was frequently amazed at how many times when just as the Cards made a big play something would happen to negate it. Penalty flags, the refs overturning the call after reviewing, and then at the end of the 4th qtr when Dallas had to kick a 57 yd field goal - then they gave what was it an unsportsmanlike penalty or something? - and it was suddenly a 52 yd fg. I shouted out loud "This is such BS!" because I hate the Cowgirls and was so frustrated how every call seems to go their way. And then the fg was blocked but the coach had called a timeout so the Cowboys got to rekick and then made the fg - AGGGH!!!

But despite those frustrations, the Cards still managed to win in spite of the refs and in spite of the tuck rule and in spite of themselves!

Dallas won the toss and I said to myself, "Now Dallas is going to win in OT, dangit". But then they went three and out and then that blocked punt returned for a TD by our own Monty Beisel!!

The tuck rule is quite possibly the STUPIDEST thing I have ever seen in all of sports.

If you don't throw the ball and tuck it back into your body, you are still carrying the ball. You are still in possession. If you fumble, you fumble. Period. It's not an incomplete pass because the ball never left the QB's hand while the arm was going forward. In fact, the arm is retracting. Tho the QB may start the motion with the intention of throwing, if he decides not to throw and brings the ball back in, it is a pump fake. Nothing more.

I hope I never see this R-tarded rule come in to play ever again. It infuriates me every time I see it because it is so ridiculous.

I've been watching football for quite a while, but something I saw in last Sundays Cowboys / Cardinals game has me confused. On the play where Romo was hit and fumbled in the endzone , they said it was the "Tuck" rule so no fumble. Ok that's fine, but the Cardinals did stop him in the endzone and tackled him, should that not have been at the least a saftey?

Instead the Cowboys get the ball some where around the 19 yard line. Didn't seem right to me.

You bring up a good question. No its not (by rule) a fumble, but being like they treat it a pass should have been intentional grounding due to being in teh pocket.

The rule interpretes it as being a forward pass. This is why it is not considered a fumble.

Therein lies the problem. I don't know how it can be a forward pass if the QB is pulling the ball back in to scramble or cover it up. You have to throw the ball or at least attempt to for it to be a pass. If a receiver takes a reverse, pump fakes behind the line and then fumbles while tucking the ball back in to run, I have no doubt it would be ruled a fumble. The NFL needs to fall a little less in love with it's QBs. (I agree with protecting them physically but when they make a mistake, it should rest squarely on their shoulders and they should not be bailed-out by bogus calls and stupid-@$$ rules.)

Therein lies the problem. I don't know how it can be a forward pass if the QB is pulling the ball back in to scramble or cover it up. You have to throw the ball or at least attempt to for it to be a pass. If a receiver takes a reverse, pump fakes behind the line and then fumbles while tucking the ball back in to run, I have no doubt it would be ruled a fumble. The NFL needs to fall a little less in love with it's QBs. (I agree with protecting them physically but when they make a mistake, it should rest squarely on their shoulders and they should not be bailed-out by bogus calls and stupid-@$$ rules.)

Agreed! Here's the explanation of the rule:

Tuck rule

The tuck rule is a rule in American football, currently used only by the National Football League (NFL).
Ordinarily, if the quarterback drops or loses the football while he is bringing the ball forward in a passing motion, and the ball touches the ground, it is considered an incomplete pass. If the quarterback drops or loses the football at any other time, it is considered a fumble, as if any other player had dropped it.
The tuck rule is an exception to this rule. It applies if the quarterback brings his arm forward in a passing motion, but then changes his mind and tries to keep hold of the football rather than making a pass. In this situation, if the quarterback loses the ball while stopping his passing motion or bringing the ball back to his body, it is still considered a forward pass (and thus an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground), even if the ball is moving backwards at the time the quarterback loses it.[1]

The tuck rule is a rule in American football, currently used only by the National Football League (NFL).
Ordinarily, if the quarterback drops or loses the football while he is bringing the ball forward in a passing motion, and the ball touches the ground, it is considered an incomplete pass. If the quarterback drops or loses the football at any other time, it is considered a fumble, as if any other player had dropped it.
The tuck rule is an exception to this rule. It applies if the quarterback brings his arm forward in a passing motion, but then changes his mind and tries to keep hold of the football rather than making a pass. In this situation, if the quarterback loses the ball while stopping his passing motion or bringing the ball back to his body, it is still considered a forward pass (and thus an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground), even if the ball is moving backwards at the time the quarterback loses it.[1]